It is mostly about stories on the Korean people’s struggles against the U. S. bases in Korea. Hope many of you find some clues and sources here. Please just be kind and fair to the source.많은 분들께서 여기에서 단서들과 자료들을 찾길 바랍니다. 다만 단서와 자료의 기원에 대해 친절하고 공정하게 표기해 주시면 감사하겠읍니다.

Monday, August 31, 2009

* Below is the temporary English transaltion of the article in the photo. It is the interview with Bruce K. Gagnon, Secretary of the Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space(www.space4peace.org, space4peace.blogspot.com) by Mr. Jeong, Yong-In, reporter from the Weekly Kyunghyang. Its website version is here.

Through this article, Bruce Gagnon was selected as the 'Today's Figure' with the title, ' “ Today’s Figure, Secretary, Bruce Gagnon, ‘Why Don’t Make the Voice Against the Rocket Naro’” by the Daum website on Aug. 27, 2009. The second site recorded the demographics of the readers.

2. Bruce Gagnon, Secretary of the Global Network (third from the left) is having the denouncing statement at the press interview for the urge to stop the Ulchi Freedom Guardian training, sponsored by the SPARK, at the TANGO base, Seongnam, Kyunggi-do, on Aug. 17. (Yonhap News)

“ The South Koreans should ask themselves for what the rocket would be launched this time, whether it has only simply the good purpose as known to the public. Further, they have to ask what relationship the South Korean space program has with the space control & domination policies of the United States.

It is the ‘opinion’ by Bruce Gagnon, an United States peace activist on the launch of the rocket NARO (KSLV-1). He is in charge of the secretary of the Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space (afterward, Global Network). This international organization, affiliated by the 150 groups in the world was founded in 1992. In the South Korea, Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea (SPARK) and the Peace Network have participated in it. Gagnon initiated the foundation of this organization and has worked on it.

He made a keynote speech, participating in the ‘International Conference against the Asia Pacific Missile Defense and End of Arms Race’ last April. His revisit this time for a week since Aug. 14 is after the speeches and symposiums upon the invitation of Mayor Akiba Tadadosi, Hiroshima, Japan. It was Aug. 18 that I interviewed him. A day before the launch of the rocket Naro was planned.

He said that, “It is surprising that there is almost none opinion claim even among the peace activists here” (Anyhow, the launch of the rocket Naro was stopped remaining seven minute 56 seconds for ‘the lack of software’) He claimed that we should clearly know that the rocket Naro have the military purpose such as carrying war and corporate profit. Military purpose of the rocket Naro? It has been a seldom known story. However, once researched, it is mentioned in some sites.

The Seoul sinmun [* meaning newspaper] reported on Aug. 19 that “ The Korean Aegis Destroyer Sejong, the Great carries the exercise to trace the orbit of the rocket Naro at the same time with the launch of the rocker Naro.” The newspaper predicted that “It would be a kind of an information war on the sea among the powerful countries near the vicinity of the Korean peninsula, which would check the Aegis system one another and try to detect the South Korean’s space development ability.” However, is it that the mission of the scientific technology satellite No. 2 is to measure the radiation energy of the earth and air/ overseas for minutes for two years, isn’t it?

The Unknown Military Purpose of the Rocket Naro

Does the opinion of the Secretary, Gagnon means the [satellite] has the dual purpose such as the military appropriation while it is claimed to have the peaceful use of the space on surface?

“ Yes. There are dual purposes in all the space plans by all the countries. I think there is a need to point out a hypocrisy here. There have been the blames against the North Korea when it launched the satellite and even the words of the interception of it. However, nobody blames the South Korea when it launches the rocket. This is really a hypocrisy. It should be mentioned that the military purpose is applied to the both.”

There is a difference. Hasn’t the process in case of the North Korea been secretly processed, has it? On the other hand, in the case of the rocket Naro, the process has been open. There has been the historical experience that the [South Korea’s] independent technology development of the [rocket] has been frustrated after its drive of it by the Park Jung-Hee regime because of the curb by the United States in the 70s, as in the case of the nuclear. Since then, the South Korea chose the way of the open development of it under the control of the United States.

“ That’s right. The United States tries to draw many of its alliance countries under its control. The space development of the South Korea and Japan is the one example. The Space Command in the United States boasts that the space industry project is the largest industry project in the history of the earth. Thus, it takes enormous cost and because the United States can not pay all that huge cost alone, it tries to hand over the economic burden to the other (countries). Despite that, the development process is under the total control of the United States.

Is the United States the center of the ‘Weaponization of Space?’ Was the old Soviet the same with the United states, having the space development race, for example, wasn’t it?

“ During the eight years of [President] Bill Clinton, eight years of [President] Bush and to the current administration of Barak Obama, the Russia and China have presented the resolution preventing the space weapons to the United Nations. Thus every year, these two countries have presented the new treaty on it to the General Assembly of the U. N. but only three countries have been opposing it. Do you know which countries they are?”

I don’t know.

The United States, Israel and the Micronesia. The reason that Micronesia opposes is because there is the U.S. launch base in the Kwajallen atoll. Those countries oppose it for the two reasons. The first is to control and dominate the space. The Second is to prevent the other countries’ use of access to space. If you go to the U.S. space command, there is the logo of master of space. In other words, it means who controls the space can control and dominate the earth.

Let’s return to the issue of Naro. Is the mission of the Naro for the scientific, peaceful purpose such as the measuring of air, isn’t it? You, Secretary’s words sound like the radical claim to oppose all the scientific technology such as the Luddite movement (machine destruction movement) in the 19th century.

“ I and the organization I am related to never oppose the technology in general. The organization, as its name opposes the weaponization and militarization of space. We watch the baseball game and sees the weathercast through satellite. Some of the people participating in our organization are famous scientists. Our core concern is to prevent the wars caused by the wrong use of technology.“

The Organization Widely Known for the Cassini Campaign

There are many organizations demanding anti-war. It could be thought to be far away from the issues in the reality to talk about the space weapon and war. Is there any religious background or relationship with it? For example, the Raelian often talks about the ‘space issue’ as well.

“ It is a rather moral, ethical question than the religious. We need to ask the moral, ethical question whether it is right to pay the enormous cost to it at the sacrifice of such as, healthcare, education and all the things that we can give to our next generations. During my 27 year works on this movement, I know that one can not well deal with the peace issues without dealing with the space issues. We need to inform people that the efforts of the abolishing the nuclear weapons are closely connected to the space issues.

Even though it is not known domestically, it is since the campaign related to the Cassini probe plan initiated by the NASA and the ESA[?] that the ‘Global Network’ has spread it name in the world . The Cassini probe plan, 1997 is the project to explore the Saturn and Titan, the Saturn’s satellite and to return back to earth. And the Global Network warned that plutonium was used in the Cassini space craft. As a result, the Cassini had to be changed with its original plan to orbit within 500mile from the earth to 500mile above it. It was the victory of campaign. During the trip to the Saturn, plutonium was not used as a fuel. It was only used for the maintenance of the electric facilities on board. However, Gagnon says the Cassini was like the ‘icebreaker’ or “Trojan horse’ . He recalls, “ The general public did not even know the Cassini spacecraft plan, and the NASA was telling them on it as it has only the pure scientific mission. Our job as activists was to reveal how the Cassini spacecraft had the deadly relationship with the nuclear industry. Even though it was not directly related to the military use of it, the Cassini campaign with the use of the nuclear power, was the opening gate to test its possibility .”

The military industry complex have announced that the nuclear power is the only solution for the strong propelling power for the long time space flight, and it is the claim of these grous that it has become the common sense while repeatedly injected the claim. Then why they make the matter of life and death to keep the expansion of the nuclear power?

“ The reason is that the nuclear industry thinks the space as the new market such as for the nuclear reactor, rocket and engine. They claim it to make the mining colony in the Moon and Mars in the long term. But the plutonium is the matter. According to the report of an energy related organization, plutonium has contaminated air, water and workers. We oppose it to move it to space.”

The Lee Myung Bak administration has recently gotten entangled as to announce the full participation of the PSI and postpone it upon the North Korea’s missile launch and nuclear tests. The experts are thinking that the PSI participation would be automatically linked to the participation in MD.

“ The MD issue is the core issue of the Global Network. The United States wants to deploy the Missile Defense system in many countries in the world. MD, despite its name, Missile Defense is not for the defense but for preemptive attack. For example, if Russia takes aim at the United States with 100 nuclear missiles, the limited Missile Defense system can not cover it. In other words, only through the preemptive attack, the MD can work.”

According to you, it means not defense but offense, then why did the people who drove it name it as defense ?

“ Because only by that, it could be sold. If you see the real content [of the MD], it is very expensive, provoking (the counter-part who is the target for attack) and the imperfect system. The PAC3 in the Asia Pacific is shown to be not only against the North Korea but also against the China. Last April, the United States Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, saying ‘ More Aegis Destroyers would be converted to be outfitted with the ballistic missile defense’ has had the significant remarks that ‘ It would help to counter the China.’.

The Progressive Front of the United States, Disappointed by the Stagnation of the Reform by Obama

The MD issue of the North East Asia has been long-time issue though. How is the case of Obama? Does he want to maintain the policy [of the predecessors] ? Was he elected by the support of many people, for the pledges such as the social reform , for example, health care and withdrawal of the troops from Iraq, wasn’t he?

“ Most of the progressive fronts have disappointed by all the issues he suggested. They think he betrayed them. Thus Obama is losing his supporters. The poll has become low. It is becoming more clear when you see the expansion of war in the Afghanistan. Obama will not be able to bring up the change(which was his election slogan) any more. To speak easily, if Bush is a ‘bad cowboy’, Obama is a ‘good cowboy’. The important point is that Obama is still supporting the military imperialism.”

If one looks at Gagnon’s blog or writings in the media, he often mentions the Korean examples. Last May, he submitted an open letter pointing out the injustice of the arrest of the PKAR members. Looking at his Korean trip schedule, even though there are public speeches or symposium in the PSPD & Peace Network, his participation in the various realities in Korea, such as the visit to the Pan-Korea committee on Yongan , participation in the press interview sponsored by the peace unification organization and visit to the Korean Confederation of the Trade Unions., is remarkable. It was curious how he has become concerned with the Korean issues. Is there any Korean among his relatives of his father and mother sides?

“ I was born in July 27, 1952. It is only a year before the signing of the Korea War Armistice Agreement. My father was in the air force during the Korean war. His hobbies were to take the photographs of the daily lives of the Korean people. I grew up looking at the photos. ” Once the supporter of the Republican as to act in the election movement for Nixon in his youth, his idea has become changed since his participation in the Vietnam war. (Currently he is the member of the Veteran’s for Peace, as well) Working at the [Florida] Coalition for Peace and Justice after working at the Farmers’ union at the Florida state, he initiated the ‘Global Network’. When asked whether there is any message to the Lee Myung Bak government, he shortly replied, “OUT”.

* Below was addressed in Seoul on Aug. 19 and Aug. 20, 2009. The translation below is by Ko, Hong-Kyeong and Jung, Yong-Joon, interns of the Peace Network

It is a great pleasure to be with all of you tonight. Let me first say a few words about my own personal history and the organization I work for. I grew up in a military family and lived in various places around the world. In 1971, being a young conservative like my father, I too joined the US Air Force and was stationed in California at an airlift base for the Vietnam war. Soldiers would come from all over the country to board the planes to Vietnam. When the huge transport jets returned they carried the wounded soldiers and the body bags of those troops who had been killed. As a result, there were frequently anti-war protests outside my base. Although they were often very small, they caused the GI’s on our base to endlessly debate the war. This is the time that I became a peace activist.

Some of you may remember June 12, 1982, a historic day. On that day almost a million people demonstrated outside the United Nations, calling for nuclear abolition. People came from all over the world for the UN Special Session on Disarmament that was called to deal with the continued use of violence in international affairs and with the growing nuclear arms race.

I did not attend the June 12 march but did watch the rally on public television from my home in Orlando, Florida. After the rally was over, the TV coverage switched to a conference where Lt. Gen. Daniel Graham was speaking. At the time Gen. Graham was President Ronald Reagan's head of the Strategic Defense Initiative, or Star Wars.

During a question and answer session following Graham's speech a man asked him, "General, they say there are almost a million people in New York City today demonstrating for disarmament. Aren't you worried about that?" Without missing a beat Gen. Graham responded, "No, I think it's great. They are out there protesting against ICBM's and we're moving into space. They don't have a clue. Let them keep doing what they are doing."

Imagine my surprise at hearing this. What was he talking about? I knew very little about this. It was then that I began working to help prevent the arms race from moving into the heavens.

The following year, just as the nuclear freeze campaign was taking off all over the U.S., I became the state coordinator of the Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice, where I helped to build a statewide movement opposing all nuclear weapons. I also began working hard to learn about, and to share with the public, as much as I could about Gen. Graham’s Star Wars plans.

Those of us living in Florida could quickly understand the plans for space warfare, as the Kennedy Space Center and NASA, the space agency, are based in the center of the state, not far from where I was living at the time. I began organizing people to go to the space center for protests whenever military satellites were launched, when Trident nuclear missiles were test-fired from there, or when NASA launched space missions with highly-toxic plutonium-238 on-board.

It was during this time that I learned that much of what the so-called “civilian” NASA space agency was doing is actually “dual use”, meaning virtually every space mission served two masters. Civilian space missions are routinely used to test space weapons technologies.

By 1992, the Florida Coalition for Peace & Justice had become so heavily involved in the space issue in Florida that we began looking around for more allies. We had earlier discovered an organization, called Citizens for Peace in Space, in the state of Colorado, where the US Space Command was headquartered. This relationship led to the creation of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space that I coordinate today.

As we organized the Global Network we learned about US space warfare bases in England, Greenland, Norway, Australia, and in other parts of the world. Local peace groups in those countries quickly became part of our movement, and today we have 150 affiliated organizations around the planet, including two here in South Korea – the Civil Network and SPARK.

In the years that followed, we began collecting and sharing the US Space Command’s detailed plans for space. “Master of Space” is the logo of the 50th Space Wing at the headquarters of the Air Force Space Command in Colorado.

In an important planning document called “Vision for 2020”, published in 1997 during the presidency of Bill Clinton, the Space Command calls for US “control and domination” of space, saying: “Control of space is the ability to assure access to space, freedom of operations within the space medium, and an ability to deny others the use of space.”

Each branch of the military, the Army, Navy, and Air Force, now has its own space command.

When the Space Command talks about “exploiting space” it doesn’t only mean using it as a weapons platform. Scientists have discovered precious mineral resources on the moon, Mars and asteroids. One reason so many nations, including South Korea, are so interested in developing moon missions is because helium-3 has been discovered there.

South Korea hopes to orbit the moon by 2020 and have a lunar lander by 2025. Scientists believe that helium-3 could be used to fuel fusion reactors back on Earth, making the profits of the oil corporations pale in comparison. This new race to the planets could be another source of conflict here on Earth unless the world begins now to insist on peaceful, and cooperative space exploration.

The taxpayers will build the rockets for nations like the US and South Korea and the aerospace corporations intend to make the profit from "mining the sky" for precious resources.

Let us now return to the Space Command and further define some of the terms it uses. “Full spectrum dominance” means that the US military will control all war fighting at every level of conflict. The Army will control the ground; the Navy will control the oceans; the Air Force will control the air, and the Space Command will control space.

There is just one problem: If the US can do this, so can some other country. Thus, the Space Command says, it must “deny” certain countries access to space. It must be the “Master of Space.” To carry out this denial mission, the Space Command has said, it must have weapons in space that would be able to take out a competitor nation’s “space assets” — meaning their satellites.

We now know that military satellites are what controls war on the ground today. When the Pentagon launched the initial attack in the “shock and awe” invasion of Iraq in 2003, 70% of the weapons that were used were directed to their targets by space satellites.

The Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, or drones as they are often called, that are killing many civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan today, are actually flown by pilots sitting at computer terminals at military bases inside the US. In real time, split second time, the pilots can watch the ground in Afghanistan from cameras mounted on the drones and order them to fire their deadly missiles using satellite technology.

The idea that no competitor nation will be allowed to have access to space during conflict is of course a very provocative one to Russia, China, and even the European Union. The EU has responded to this fact by creating their own military satellite navigation and targeting system, called Galileo.

Another important point that must be mentioned is the cost of Star Wars. Not only does the militarization of space make life on Earth less secure today, because it fuels a new arms race, but it is also extremely expensive. The aerospace industry has boasted that Star Wars will be the largest industrial project in the history of the planet. No matter how hard the US government tries, it cannot afford to pay for this new arms race in space by itself. This is where the allies come into the equation. One of the Pentagon’s top jobs today is to persuade Japan, South Korea, Australia, England, Germany, India, and other nations to become a part of the program to put the expensive space warfare system into place. That of course means that many social and environmental needs will be neglected or ignored completely.

So today we see the US expanding PAC-3 and THAAD missile defense programs throughout the world, particularly in the Asian-Pacific region. We see the Pentagon pushing for “missile defense” deployments in Poland and the Czech Republic against the will of the people in those nations. We see US Star Wars radar facilities being expanded and upgraded in England, Australia, Germany, Greenland, Norway, and in other places around the world for the purpose of communicating with new generations of military satellites that will help direct this program of “full spectrum dominance.”

In the US, we see space technology weapons programs under development like laser weapon systems, new generations of war-fighting satellites, cyber warfare systems, the military space plane, and hives of miniature robotic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Let me talk about just one of these programs to illustrate how space technology “advancements” are a danger to global hopes for nuclear disarmament.

Gen. James Cartwright, the Vice-Chairman of the Pentagon’s Joint Chiefs of Staff recently concluded that conventionally-armed bombers are “too slow and too intrusive” for many “global strike missions.” Gen. Cartwright pushes for a “prompt global strike” weapon, which would be ultra-fast and fitted with a conventional warhead. The general says that the military needs ”hypersonic” weapons that would travel through space to take out targets on the other side of the planet.

For the past several years the US Space Command has been annually computer war-gaming such an attack. Set in the year 2016 the Pentagon launches the military space plane that takes off like an airplane, flies through space, and then unleashes a devastating first-strike attack on China’s nuclear forces all within one hour. China then attempts to launch a retaliatory strike with its tens of nuclear missiles capable of hitting the west coast of the continental US. But US “missile defense” systems, like those parked nearby on Naval Aegis destroyers, in Japan, South Korea, Australia, and possibly even Taiwan, help take out China’s crippled nuclear response. Missile defense, sold to the public as a defensive system, is really designed by the Pentagon to be the shield after the first-strike sword has lunged into the heart of China’s nuclear arsenal.

Imagine, if you would, how the leaders inside China view this war game. The technologies are now being developed to destroy the firewall between conventional and nuclear weapons. Space technology thus becomes the enabler of first-strike military doctrine. Any hopes for serious nuclear abolition negotiations with China are irreparably harmed by the militarization and weaponization of space.

Some, when they hear about the Space Command plans like Vision for 2020 or the 2016 computer war games against China, say that these developments are just theoretical, that the Global Network makes too much out of nothing. But there is much more to consider.

Just after the 9-11 attacks in New York, the Strategic Command, at Omaha, Nebraska in the mid-western US, began undergoing a complete overhaul in its role and mission. For years the famous Strategic Air Command (SAC) was the bomber and nuclear missile command for the Pentagon, charged with providing “nuclear deterrence.” Now though the Strategic Command (or StratCom as it is popularly called) has been charged with new, more aggressive missions.

Tim Rinne, the State Coordinator of Nebraskans for Peace has watched the quick evolution of StratCom and describes it this way: “Those so-called ‘Missile Defense’ installations proposed for Poland and the Czech Republic - that’s StratCom. StratCom coordinated the shoot-down in February 2008 of a falling US spy satellite with a ‘missile defense’ interceptor launched from an Aegis cruiser in the Pacific Ocean. Those CIA Predator drones flying over Pakistani airspace are flown with the aid of StratCom’s space assets, with intelligence supplied by StratCom spy satellites. Those Echelon National Security Agency listening stations in Misawa, Japan; Pine Gap, Australia and Waihopai, New Zealand — that are eavesdropping on your phone calls and emails — are all part of StratCom’s network. The recent clash between a US spy ship and Chinese naval defenses in the South China Sea is linked to StratCom’s mission as well. And StratCom’s presence is also felt in the Asian-Pacific where it is responsible for preparing to launch preemptive nuclear or conventional strikes against North Korea, and the military encirclement of China.”

The entire US military is now tied together using space technology. StratCom maintains that all warfare on the Earth today is “net-centric.” With military satellites in space the US can see virtually everything on the planet and can target virtually any place on the Earth.

One finds oneself asking the question, why? Why, when we already have a maddening nuclear arms race, is the US pushing the militarization and weaponization of space?

President Obama’s new National Security Adviser, Gen. James Jones was the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. In 2006, Gen. Jones told the media, “NATO is developing a special plan to safeguard oil and gas fields in the [Caspian sea] region…. Our strategic goal is to expand to Eastern Europe and Africa.”

Who is the competitor of the US in Africa? The Pentagon maintains that it is China, largely due to the fierce international competition for dwindling supplies of oil, natural gas, coal, uranium, and other resources around the world.

In April of 2009 Army Gen. Walter Sharp, the commander of US forces Korea, told members of the US Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington that the US-South Korean alliance was “a linchpin for stability in Northeast Asia.”

The US now has 30 ground-based interceptor missiles deployed in South Korea. Many peace activists here, and in Japan, strongly believe that the ultimate target of these systems is not North Korea, but China and Russia.

The current US military transformation underway in South Korea and Japan is indeed a key element in this regional offensive strategy to contain China while justifying the military expansion as containment of North Korea. I believe North Korea’s recent nuclear test and missile tests have been a desperate reaction from an insecure nation worried about the US military strategy of “full spectrum dominance.” While North Korea’s tests were wrong, and only helped to justify “missile defense” deployments in response, it must also be remembered that the US launched a nuclear ICBM from Vandenberg AFB in California toward the Pacific on June 29 and another is planned on August 23.

Why is it OK for South Korea to launch a space rocket but wrong for North Korea to do the same? South Korea has sent 10 satellites into space and nine more will be launched by 2015. But when the DPRK said they were launching a satellite into space the world went crazy.

We now hear Japan and South Korea talking about "preemptive" attacks on North Korea.Reunification on the Korean peninsula will only happen after the US-South Korea-Japan nuclear alliance is terminated.

Today US forces in Japan and South Korea are being used for global intervention in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. The next step is likely to be the ROK and Japan forces becoming involved in US and NATO interventions around the world.

China maintains that deployment of “missile defense” systems in the Asia-Pacific region by the US and its allies is a threat to hopes for nuclear disarmament.

US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ comments were quite revealing last April when he said, “We’re converting more Navy Aegis ships to have ballistic missile defense that would help against China.”

Living in Bath, Maine I have a special perspective on this US-China naval competition. In my town, the Navy builds the Aegis destroyer that is outfitted with missile defense systems and is being deployed in the Asian-Pacific region. The two Republican senators from my state maintain that more Pentagon funds for Aegis shipbuilding are needed to “contain” China.

Obama is calling for a 4% increase in military spending in 2010. Most other nations around the globe are also increasing their military budgets.

Why is virtually every country in the world expanding its military at the very time that everyone agrees that we must put the nuclear genie back into the bottle?

We all know that fossil fuels are a declining natural resource on our fragile Mother Earth. Many experts now say we’ve reached the peak of oil availability and are now quickly heading down the hill toward scarcity at the very time that global demand for oil is growing.

Renowned author Noam Chomsky says US foreign policy is now all about controlling most of the world’s oil supply as a “lever of world domination.” One way to keep Europe, China, India and other emerging markets dependent on the US and in sync with its policies is to maintain control of the oil supply they’re reliant on. Even as the US economy is collapsing, the Pentagon appears to be saying; whoever controls the keys to the world’s economic engine still remains in charge.

China, for example, imports up to 80% of its oil through the Malacca Straits. If any competitor nation was able to militarily control that transit route and choke off China’s oil supply, its economy could be held hostage. Many thus wonder if the current doubling of the US military presence in the Asian-Pacific is really due to North Korea’s nuclear program or is actually a part of a larger military strategy to ensure US control?

In his book, The Grand Chess Board, former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote, "For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia... and America's global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained…. The primary interest is to gain geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan…and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking Central Asia with the Arabian Sea." It should be remembered that Brzezinski was a chief foreign policy adviser to President Obama during his recent presidential campaign.

Russia has the world’s largest deposits of natural gas and significant supplies of oil. The US has recently built military bases in Romania and Bulgaria and will soon be adding more in Albania. NATO has been expanding eastward into Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, right on Russia’s border. Georgia and the Ukraine are next on the list to become members of what is quickly becoming a global NATO military alliance.

The NATO Treaty’s Article 5 is quite clear that if one NATO member country is attacked, it is the responsibility, the obligation, of all NATO members to join in defense of that country. That means that if Georgia, which the US is now promoting for full membership in the alliance, got into another hot conflict with neighboring Russia, NATO would be called upon to go to war with Russia.

Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev delivered the opening address at the “Overcoming Nuclear Dangers” conference in Rome on April 16, 2009. He noted, “Unless we address the need to demilitarize international relations, reduce military budgets, put an end to the creation of new kinds of weapons and prevent weaponization of outer space, all talk about a nuclear-weapon-free world will be just inconsequential rhetoric.”

I must turn to Mr. Gorbachev for one more important point here. In a very recent interview with a German newspaper, he commented that Western Germany, the US and other powers had pledged after Germany’s reunification in 1990 that, “NATO would not move a centimeter to the east.” This broken promise had led to Russia’s disillusionment with relations with the West, Gorbachev said.

China is not sitting still as these US military moves are made on the grand chessboard. In 2007, they destroyed one of their own defunct satellites with a ballistic missile as a way to show the world that they had “anti-satellite” weapons capability. This contributed to the growing problem of space debris that is now dangerously orbiting the Earth and, if worsened, could one day make it virtually impossible for any nation to launch a rocket into space, due to the minefield of space junk surrounding the planet.

For many years Russia and China have introduced resolutions at the UN calling for negotiations on a new treaty that would ban weapons in space. All countries of the world have supported the resolution with the exception of the US, Israel, and Micronesia. This was true during the Clinton presidency as well as during the reign of George W. Bush. It will be crucial for President Obama, if he truly hopes to reset relations with Moscow, to seriously enter into negotiations for a global ban on weapons in space.

Just prior to the recent Moscow nuclear weapons negotiations between the US and Russia, President Obama’s senior director for Russian affairs on the National Security Council told the media, “We don’t need the Russians…We’re not going to reassure or give or trade anything with the Russians regarding NATO expansion or missile defense.”

Based on the tentative agreement that has come out of the US-Russia summit on July 6 it appears that “very modest” changes at best can be expected in the near term when it comes to the nuclear arsenals of the two powers.

The world clearly hears the US and its allies lecturing Iran and North Korea about the evils of nuclear weapons, and cringes when it listens to the threats of preemptive attack against those two nations if they do not halt their nuclear weapons development programs. But in fairness, one must reflect on the American Congressional decision to go forward with the US-India nuclear program that will assist that nation in ultimately building more nuclear weapons — even as India refuses to sign the NPT.

The public is losing confidence in leaders and government. It is as if the people of the world are captives on a sinking ship and they are stuck in the lower decks with no way out. They feel powerless about the things that they most care about.

We must begin to call for the conversion of the global military machine to peaceful production. This would give us the ability to energize the sinking global economy with green jobs.

We must talk about the connections between nuclear weapons and the offensive nature of so-called “missile defense”.

Until we overcome the legacy of past wars, like the Korean War that still continues after 58 years, misunderstanding and miscalculations will continue. We must recognize that growing military alliances and expansion of conventional forces will negate our wishes for nuclear abolition, peace, and reunification.

We must respect and keep the UN Charter that outlaws preemptive war and calls for peaceful resolution of conflicts.

The membership of the Global Network is ready to work with each of you on this important agenda.

Maybe if we do these things, change will come at last to the world.We have no other choice.Thank you very much.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

South Korea's first home-grown rocket and satellite launch was a failure today. The $400 million rocket delivered its satellite payload far above its intended orbit. The cost of the satellite is not being mentioned in South Korean media, likely because they don't want the taxpaying citizens to be aware of the massive amounts of public funds lost on the failed mission.

"Since the 100kg scientific satellite does not have any on-board propulsion systems, if it fails to enter proper orbit there is no way to correct its trajectory," one expert said. He declined to say whether the satellite was lost or if it went into orbit, but cannot be found.

Not enough people in the South Korean peace movements are yet knowledgeable about space issues to the point where they were actively tracking this mission. After my recent trip there, and this failed launch, I would imagine that will begin to change.

One of the interesting things about this South Korean rocket launch is the hypocrisy connected to it. When North Korea recently launched a rocket and attempted to put a satellite in orbit both the US and South Korean governments went ballistic - pardon the pun. But when the shoe was on the other foot, no problem at all is proclaimed. This double standard is the reason that so many people around the world have such little respect for the US and its allies these days.

My mother always used to say, "What's good for the goose, is good for the gander."

On August 23 the US test-fired another Minuteman nuclear missile from Vandenberg AFB in California into Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific Ocean. Then South Korea fireslaunches its first rocket. In both cases these two "good guy" countries are doing the same thing they scream at North Korea for trying to do. You can't have it both ways.

Why is testing nuclear rockets and putting satellites in orbit wrong for one country but OK for another? I guess the answer is: which side of corporate capitalism are you on?

The Shadow 200 went down Thursday night near the Camp Casey US army base at Dongducheon, 18 kilometres (11 miles) south of the Demilitarised Zone which bisects the peninsula, a US military spokesman said.

Appeal: I Condemn Kyusyu Electric Power Co. for its plutonium-utilization policy.

It wason March 12th, 1997 that Kyusyu Electric Power Co began its apparent move towards a new system of power generation with the use of pluthermal. It held a meeting with local people in the Town of Genkai, explaining to them their plan of implementation of plutermal power generation at one reactor. Afterwards, our struggle began.

We formed in May 2005 ‘ Circle for demanding Kyusyu Electric Power Co. for an open discussion meeting on pluthermal plan,’ carrying out lecture gatherings within the Prefecture of Saga, negotiations with the company, requesting open discussions. In April 2004 when finally their pluthermal plan fully surfaced, we conducted a campaign titled ‘ Stop pluthermal! Urgent Petition Campaign of 200,000 endorsements,’ requesting Governor Furukawa of Saga not to hastily approve of the pluthermal plan, and submitted to the prefectural office the final 305,068 petitions obtained from around Japan.

On April 28th, 2004, Kyusyu Electric Power Co. formally declared its pluthermal plan at No.3 reactor of Genkai Power Plant, and on March 26th, 2006, Governor Furukawa of Saga Prefecture gave his consent, answering to the company’s request for his approval prior to an official one.

Reacting such approval of his which neglected many voices of opposition among citizens, a counter-action by citizens started in the form of a campaign demanding for a prefectural referendum

where each resident in the Prefecture of Saga will have a vote on the pluthermal plan. We formed ‘

Circle by Residents in Saga for Deciding on Pluthermal and Critical matters in Prefectural Referendum.’ This campaign finally collected the effective number of 49,609 endorsements, and after the public viewing of the petition list, an official request was made to Governor Furukawa of the enactment of an ordinance on a referendum. At an extraordinary session of the prefectural assembly

on Jan. 30th, 2007, two representatives of the above mentioned circle made statements as first citizens to do so at the assembly, asking the assembly members their understanding towards a prefectural referendum, but the referendum draft which was first in Saga prefecture was voted down. Later on, in the City of Karatsu, which is next to the area of the nuclear power plant, similar effort was made by local citizens of requesting the legislation of a municipal referendum, which was similarily rejected by the city assembly.

On March 23rd this year, when MOX fuel was to be brought in, we newly formed ‘ Circle of No! to Pluthermal by Saga Locals,’ determined to halt the pluthermal program. Our new aim is to collect petitions from over 400,000 residents in Saga, as the number is the majority of voters in the prefecture, and then to submit the petitions to the Governor and the Chair of the prefectural assembly. In May, when MOX fuel was supposed to arrive, we carried out ‘ 5.10 Saga Festival for forming human letters of Stop! Pluthermal,’ as if we were defensing our prefecture with human letters by 2000 residents from the danger of the world-wide controversial MOX fuel coming in. Now out struggle is in a bigger swing, with a lot more people of the same spirit involved in.

At the time of Governor Furukawa giving his prior consent in March, 2006, the controversy was centered on how to deal with spent MOX fuel in the near future. As for this issue, the prefectural officer of Saga answered, saying ‘ I hear reprocessing of spent MOX fuel is technologically possible, as it has been actually reprocessed in Japan or abroad. Regarding a second reprocessing plant, we will begin drawing the plan from around 2010, thinking we can handle it properly according to the guideline by the central government that the planned reprocessing operation of spent MOX fuel in the 2nd plant will be decided well in time for the termination of reprocessing operation at Rokkasyo, Aomori.’ However, even in 2009, the situation is not clear as to whether or not such reprocessing operation of spent MOX fuel is possible, which resulted in the decision by The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan of the postponement of pluthermal plan for 5 years by the electric companies other than the three of Kyusyu, Shikoku, and Chubu Electric Power Companies.

So what is pluthermal plan for? Kyusyu Electric Power Co. says ‘ It is indispensable for Japan which lacks in energy resources to establish a nuclear fuel cycle where spent fuel is reprocessed, collecting plutonium and uranium, which can be reprocessed into usable fuel. Implementing pluthermal plan is indispensable for that.’ However, the recent decision by the Federation of 5-year-long postponement of pluthermal plan in some areas has caused Kyusu Electric Power Co. to lose its outlook soon after the 4-time charges of MOX fuel: With 1.9 ton plutonium Kyusyu Electric Power Co. has in Britain and France, only 4-time- portions of MOX fuel can be produced. Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited changed its initial construction schedule of a MOX fuel reprocessing plant in Rokkasyo, Aomori, from starting in Oct. 2007, completing in Oct. 2012 to starting in Nov.2009, completing in June 2015. That means even if the planned MOX fuel reprocessing plant in Rokkaso starts its operation, it cannot newly produce

MOX fuel until June 2015. Therefore, if MOX fuel is to be charged for the start of operation in Oct. this year, the 4th MOX fuel charge will take place in July, 2013 and the yearly investigation, in Aug. 2014, which means the pluthermal program in Saga might be finished with the fourth charge because the scheduled MOX reprocessing plant in Aomori will not be in operation in time for the charge. When cross-examined on this matter at a shareholders’ general meeting, Kyusyu Electric Power Co. answered, ‘If we have plutonium, we will use it. But if we don’t, we will use uranium. Plutonium is not indispensable and uranium can take place of it.’ This is their true policy. Then what is the reason for their present proceedings of urgency?

We are fighting with all our might in order to halt the pluthermal plan at No.3 reactor of Genkai Nuclear Power plant, in solidarity with anti-pluthermal activities throughout Japan. Let’s keep up our efforts to realize the societies without nuclear power as soon as possible.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

* Image source/ description: same as the source below'The remains of former Philippine president Corazon Aquino passes through the historical EDSA road with some 300,000 supporters waving to pay their last respect. The road is remembered in 1986 as then anonymous Cory and some 2 million people rallied out the streets to fight a 20-year government dictatorship through peaceful people power revolution. Photo by Arwin Doloricon/ Voyage Film'

I know this post appears rather late, but I couldn’t let Cory Aquino’s death on 1 August 2009 pass without comment. The original inspiration for People Power that toppled one of the worst tyrants of the 20th Century, she would now turn the Patron Saint of peaceful democratic struggles everywhere.

Last week, I was reduced to tears reading two links that my Filipino friend Ruth Villarama, who runs Voyage Films in Manila, sent me of new comments posted on their website.

In the first post, A housewife, a leader, an angel in yellow (3 August 2009), Joan Rae Ramirez wrote: “Her death at 3 AM on August 1 has stopped a nation from its apathetic works to once again remember what was once fought by this ordinary housewife. It is on these rarest moments where the oligarchs came down from their kingdoms to pay their respect and mingle with the people who truly represent the real state of the Philippine nation.”

Karen Lim, who works with Voyage Films as a producer and project coordinator, wrote a more personalised piece titled The Famous Anonymous.

It opened with these words: “I see her on TV. In some instances I even covered her for a story. Our relationship did not go deeper than the reporter-subject, or the audience and the watched. Yet I feel a certain affinity to the most revered President. And when she died I got sad, a strange feeling of sadness where the source is unknown.”

Karen was too young to have remembered much of those heady days of the People Power Revolution of February 1986 — a series of nonviolent and prayerful mass street demonstrations in the Philippines that eventually toppled the 20-year autocracy of Ferdinand Marcos. Indeed, a whole generation of Filipinos has been born since. But that doesn’t stop them from relating to the monumental events that unfolded at at Epifanio de los Santos Avenue, known more commonly by its acronym EDSA, in Quezon City, Metropolitan Manila and involved over 2 million ordinary Filipinos as well as several political, military and religious figures.

As Karen wrote in her tribute: “Cory’s life became ours too. We watched her, sometimes we joined her. We experienced her highs and lows. We are her “Mga minamahal kong kababayan”(my beloved fellowman). She did what no stranger did in my family – unite us in prayer for the country, unite us in laughter amidst the uncertainties of those times. I had no personal connection to this lady, but I have now every reason to mourn her passing.”

South Korea's most popular president ever just died. Kim dae-Jung (left) made two trips to North Korea in order to bring national reunification to fruition. He won the Nobel Peace Prize as a result. South Korea's current president is trying to roll back the progress Kim made during his five years in office

South Korea's most popular president died while I was in their country. Kim dae-Jung served as president from 1998-2003. One peace activist in South Korea told me Kim was a "stepping stone to democracy."

Kim was almost killed in August 1973, when he was kidnapped from a hotel in Tokyo by South Korean CIA agents in response to his criticism of then President Park's yushin program. Although Kim returned to Seoul alive, he was banned from politics and imprisoned in 1976 for having participated in the proclamation of an anti-government manifesto and sentenced for five years in prison, which was reduced to house arrest in 1978.

Kim was arrested again in 1980 and sentenced to death on charges of sedition and conspiracy in the wake of a popular uprising in Gwangju, his political stronghold. The sentence was commuted to 20 years in prison and later he was given exile to the United States. Kim temporarily settled in Boston and taught at Harvard University as a visiting professor to the Center for International Affairs, until he chose to return to his homeland in 1985.

His policy of positive engagement with North Korea has been termed the "June 15 joint statement". In 2000, he participated in the first of two North-South presidential summits with North Korea's leader Kim Jong-il, which later led to his winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Kim actively called for restraint against the North Koreans after they detonated a nuclear weapon and defended the continued warming towards Pyongyang.

One South Korean academic wrote about the deceased former president, "Kim's life was like a flower that endures a harsh winter but blooms in the early summer, giving a sliver of hope to people deep in despair."

In addition to Kim's historic opening to North Korea, while in office he also implemented a law to guarantee minimum standards of living for the people of the nation.

The current president of Korea, Lee Myung-bak, is trying to roll back the social and foreign policy progress South Korea made during Kim dae-Jung's time in office. The progressive movement in South Korea is currently mobilizing at a vigorous pace to resist the right-wing policies of Lee Myung-bak. His presidential approval ratings have now plummeted to the mid-20% range. A member of Korean Veterans for Peace told me that the current President Lee "is the greatest liar in South Korean history."

On my last day in Seoul we drove past an area where huge numbers of people were lined up to participate in official mourning ceremonies for Kim. The Korean people have long suffered - first from the 35-year Japanese occupation of their country, then the deadly Korean War, forty-some years of US sponsored right-wing dictatorship in South Korea, and now the occupation of the Korean peninsula by the US military.

Kim dae-Jung gave all the people of Korea hope that reunification of the divided country was indeed possible.

http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/372539.htmlKim Dae-jung’s last diary issues public warning regarding Lee administration:Kim praises the beauty of life and commits himself to “resolving the three major crises of the present: the crisis of democracy, the economic crisis of the working class, and the crisis in inter-Korean relations”Posted on : Aug.22,2009 11:18 KST Modified on : Aug.22,2009 11:21 KST

From August 17-20 the annual U.S. Space and Missile Defense Conference was conducted in Huntsville, Alabama, which hosts the headquarters of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

Among the over 2,000 participants were the Missile Defense Agency's new director, Army Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine Gen. James Cartwright, commander of the Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command Army Lt. Gen. Kevin Campbell and NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Administrator Charles Bolden Jr.

There were also 230 exhibitors present, among them the nation's major arms manufacturers with an emphasis on those weapons companies specializing in global missile shield and space war projects. The presence of the head of NASA indicated that the distinction between the military and civilian uses of space is rapidly disappearing. As the Bloomberg news agency reported on the second day of this year, "President-elect Barack Obama will probably tear down long-standing barriers between the U.S.’s civilian and military space programs to speed up a mission to the moon amid the prospect of a new space race with China" and "Obama’s transition team is considering a collaboration between the Defense Department and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration...." [1] The recently appointed NASA chief, Bolden, is a retired Marine Corps general.47,500-Pound Missile Launcher Headed To NATO Bases In Europe?

A Reuters dispatch of August 20 on the Huntsville Space and Missile Defense Conference reported that the Boeing Company's vice president and general manager for missile defense, Greg Hyslop, announced to the conference that his company "is eyeing a 47,500-pound interceptor that could be flown to NATO bases as needed on Boeing-built C-17 cargo planes, erected quickly on a 60-foot trailer stand and taken home when judged safe to do so."

Boeing displayed a scale-model version of a mobile "two-stage interceptor designed to be globally deployable within 24 hours...." [2]

The company executive made an allusion to the fixed-site ground-based interceptor deployment planned for Poland as being politically risky - the majority of Poles oppose it if their government doesn't and Russian officials have persistently pledged to take countermeasures if the U.S. goes ahead with the project - and the above-cited Reuters report endorses the mobile interceptor proposal by claiming it could "blunt Russian fears of possible U.S. fixed missile-defense sites in Europe." [3]

How substituting a mobile missile launcher "globally deployable within 24 hours" for ten missiles permanently stationed in Poland at a location known to Russia would assuage the latter's concerns over its deterrent and retaliation capabilities being neutralized in the event of a U.S. and NATO first strike was not explained by either the Boeing official or Reuters.

Later in the same day the First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic Tomas Pojar gave the lie to the Boeing subterfuge by insisting that a "possible U.S. mobile anti-missile shield does not threaten the U.S. plans to build a radar base on Czech soil because the system is to be a combination of fixed and mobile elements" and that "The whole system will always function based on the combination of fixed and mobile elements (including many radars) that will complement one another. It is not possible otherwise." [4]

About the Site

The site is managed by an artist living in the South Korea. The photo in the profile is the children in Osan, near the Pyeongtaek where the planned US military base hub in the north east Asia and a large US air base exists. They are the children of a teacher who manages the Children Peace School there. As a part of the class programs, the children in the class drew and wrote in a cloth, their wishes of the peaceful unification of Korea some day.